[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Next pretest, and branching plans

From: Christoph
Subject: Re: Next pretest, and branching plans
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:50:30 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3

On 3/13/2010 7:38 PM, Jason Rumney wrote:
Stefan Monnier<address@hidden>  writes:
Would it make sense to create a 'make package-install' target that omits
these things (if there is other stuff besides the shortcut, that is more
intended for a real installation rather than packaging)? When I am packaging
I don't want the shortcut created.
To me at least, the name "package-install" would not be helpful.
Something like "install_files_only" would sound more meaningful (or
"install_for_packaging", or ...).
My preference would be for make install to install the files only, and a
new rule for making shortcuts (install_icons).

Most people who build from source on Windows are probably building in
the same location all the time, so they don't always need to replace the
shortcut. And if they have multiple versions installed, they will want
to maintain the shortcut icons manually to avoid having all the versions
overwrite each other.
For packaging, a make dist rule would also need to copy the dist files (libXpm.dll for example) before invoking makedist.bat to really automate the entire process.

I agree with you, Jason, that installing shortcuts should be a separate step and not the included in the normal make install (for pretty much the same reasons you pointed out). But that to me, is a separate issue from packaging.

I went ahead and implemented the following so far in my local branch:

- added an option "--distfiles [path to file, for example libXpm.dll]" to configure.bat. Adding those external binaries was the only manual step left in the process and can also be automated now.

- added build target 'dist' to makefile.w32-in.
It basically does a 'make install' without creating shortcuts, copies the distfiles, i.e. the libXpm.dll to the bin directory and then calls 'makedist.bat' to create the zip file for distribution.

One problem is that calling makedist.bat means a dependency on the trunk, since it is not available in the source tarball. Can we add the /admin/nt directory and its contents to the source tarball? Or move the files to ../nt? Then, the 'make dist' target would be able to create a zip from just the tarball, without having to have the trunk available. But since the directory structure is the same, running 'make dist' would also work in the trunk itself to easily create binary snapshots of the trunk.

The makedist.bat needs to be changed a little because it expects the files to be in a folder emacs-xx.x.xx as they are in the tarball, but that is a trivial change change to make it more generic and automated.

Also, is there any way to get the version number from a file contained in the source tar ball? Then make dist would always output a zip file properly named according to the current version.

Any thoughts?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]